On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 11:18 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 5:16 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1 for the idea
>
> >
> > There is potential for lots of developer GUCs for testing/debugging in
> > the area of logical replication but IMO it might be better to keep
> > them all separated. Putting everything into a single
> > 'logical_replication_mode' might cause difficulties later when/if you
> > want combinations of the different modes.
> >
> > For example, instead of
> >
> > logical_replication_mode = XXX/YYY/ZZZ
> >
> > maybe something like below will give more flexibility.
> >
> > logical_replication_dev_XXX = true/false
> > logical_replication_dev_YYY = true/false
> > logical_replication_dev_ZZZ = true/false
> >
>
> Even I agree that usability wise keeping them independent is better.
>
But OTOH, doesn't introducing multiple GUCs (one to allow streaming
each change, another to allow serialization, and a third one to
probably test subscriber-side work) for the purpose of testing, and
debugging logical replication code sound a bit more?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
